get_token_supply

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states what the tool returns and does not mention read-only guarantees, error behavior (e.g., invalid mint), or any rate limits or other operational traits. The word 'Get' implies a read operation, but that is not explicitly disclosed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word adds value, succinctly conveying the tool's purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is fairly complete: it states the return value (total supply and decimals) and the required subject (SPL token mint). It does not explain return structure or error cases, but these are less critical for such a straightforward getter.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has only one parameter 'mint' with no description, and schema coverage is 0%. The description partially compensates by explaining that the mint is an 'SPL token mint', giving context to the parameter, but it does not specify format (e.g., base58 string) or any additional constraints beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's function: 'Get total supply and decimals for an SPL token mint.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') and identifies the exact resource (total supply and decimals) and scope (SPL token mint), distinguishing it from siblings like get_sol_balance or get_token_accounts_by_owner.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage context is implied by the description—one would use this tool to obtain token supply information—but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives, nor any mention of exclusions or prerequisites.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.